“I’m catholic”.
If I said that in my native Northern Ireland, people would wonder why I was so candidly identifying as part of one of our ‘two communities’. My evangelical friends, meanwhile, might think I had ‘crossed the Tiber’ [i] to join the Roman Catholic Church. The word ‘catholic’ is loaded with cultural, historical and theological baggage!
For this reason, evangelicals tend not to think of themselves as ‘catholic’. Their hesitancy about the word is evident in the fact that some Protestant versions of the creeds substitute the word with ‘universal’, which tends to be what evangelicals think ‘catholic’ means. This is a great shame. Along with the other creedal words about the Church, I am convinced that ‘catholic’ is, “categorically normative in some way for orthodox ecclesiology”.[ii] In my doctoral research into church planting by evangelicals, I became convinced that ‘catholic’ denotes a thoroughly biblical quality and that evangelicals have severe case of ‘catholicity deficiency’. [iii]
‘Catholic’ transliterates the Greek word kαθολικὴ / katholike, which is a compound of κατά / kata (‘according to’) and ὅλος / holos ('whole'). To be catholic, then, is to be ‘according to the whole’. The first recorded description of the Church as ‘catholic’ was around A.D.107, when Ignatius of Antioch wrote, “wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church”.[iv] The ὅλος / holos the Church must be according to, then, is nothing less than Jesus Christ himself. This word captures succinctly what the apostle Paul says in Ephesians about the connection between the “whole” Church [v] and the “fullness of Christ”, from whom it derives its life.[vi]
From Ephesians we can identify two dimensions of catholicity: quantitative and qualitative. Quantitatively, the Church has a relevance and mission to the whole world. Qualitatively, the Church has received the full revelation and salvation of God in Christ (it is already catholic) and grows towards wholeness in him through the healthy functioning of all its parts (it must grow in catholicity). The substitute word ‘universal’ captures the quantitative dimension but neglects the qualitative. Evangelicals have been passionate about extending the gospel to all, both locally and globally, but have neglected the qualitative aspects of catholicity.
The whole local church
‘Catholicity deficiency’ exhibits in various symptoms. Banding together in tribes defined by secondary matters. Narrowed understandings of ministry that elevate some gifts and personalities above others. Tensions between ‘church’ and ‘parachurch’. Perhaps most problematic, however, is an excessive emphasis on the congregation – a group of people gathering regularly as church. In the New Testament, ‘church’ can refer to the universal Church (notably in Ephesians) and to a congregation, but it is also used in a third sense, of the whole church in a city or region.[vii] The neglect of this third sense is evident in the fact that when an evangelical says ‘local church’ they mean a congregation.
Given that few localities in the British Isles have only one congregation, neglect of the third dimension of church feeds fragmentation, duplication and even competition between congregations. Each decides what it thinks is most important – preaching, praise, pastoral care or youth ministry – then focuses on resourcing that. Congregations develop brands and descriptions that emphasise difference and give the impression of a competitive marketplace. When they do cooperate, it is often for pragmatic reasons (‘we don’t have the resources to do it alone’) more than from conviction (‘we are incomplete without each other’).
We need a corrective catholic lens to see the ‘local church’ as the whole church in our area and develop a mentality that says, ‘only separately if we must’, rather than, ‘only together when needs must’. A recovery of catholicity would change our perspective in healthy ways. We would measure a congregation’s health not only by its size and vibrancy, but also by its impact on the whole church in the locality. We would equip God’s people more intentionally for their whole mission in every area of life. We would work hard to integrate the specialist contributions of ‘parachurch’ agencies with the activities of congregations and would ensure that individuals never feel torn between these commitments. We would foster interdependence and share resources, not necessarily through formal structures (like a diocese) but in meaningful local church partnerships for mission and ministry.
‘One holy, catholic, and apostolic church’
There are, however, limits to such local church partnerships. ‘Catholic’ is one of four creedal qualities of the Church that belong together. The Church is one in catholicity and holiness and apostolicity. A congregation not committed to holiness is an unsuitable partner. To be ‘holy’ is a positive statement of dedication to Christ, but that must entail separation from sin. Churches that redefine sin by adopting official positions on moral issues that depart from Scripture and the historic church have cut themselves off from the wholeness of Christ and so cannot be faithful partners.
Most important to defining the limits of partnership, however, is apostolicity, which, as theologians from diverse traditions have recognised,[viii] determines our understanding of the other creedal words. Apostolicity refers to continuity with the Lord Jesus through the apostles he appointed. Roman Catholicism and Protestantism differ over how this works. Roman Catholics believe in ‘apostolic succession’ – the apostles’ authority passed to bishops in communion with Peter’s successor, the bishop of Rome. Protestants, by contrast, seek continuity with the apostles by holding to the apostolic writings (the New Testament) as the only authoritative standard for life and doctrine. These are mutually exclusive options. Even ecumenically minded Roman Catholic theologians grant, at most, “a large measure of apostolicity”, to Protestant denominations that reject apostolic succession.[ix]
This difference really matters in practice. Papal rulings on matters of belief and practice, for example concerning Mary, sacraments and purgatory, are authoritative in Roman Catholicism. Protestants committed to the authority of Scripture alone (sola Scriptura) identify these as departures from, “the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Sola Scripture, along with the other Reformation solas,[x] puts clear blue theological water between Protestantism and Rome that should not be ignorded.
Sadly, some evangelicals today do just that when they describe some practising Roman Catholics as ‘Evangelical Catholics’ on the basis of experiences alone, such as love for Jesus and other manifestations of the Spirit, reading the Bible, and running evangelistic courses.[xi] Experience matters to evangelicals – we believe in personal conversion – but so must doctrine – we are ‘gospel’ people.[xii] Clarity about what the gospel is and on whose authority we receive it is, therefore, vital for evangelicals.
Evangelicals can embrace individual Roman Catholics who have a genuine faith in Christ as brothers and sisters, but a person cannot be simultaneously both a convinced evangelical and a committed Roman Catholic. It would be better to be honest about our theological differences. Roman Catholics and evangelicals may be able to work together in some ways, but the kind of local church partnership I envisage requires an agreed understanding of apostolicity expressed in a shared definition of the gospel.
In conclusion, I believe evangelicals need to recover catholicity. True catholicity is qualitative as well as quantitative. It transcends tribalism and surpasses sectarianism. Within the boundaries of the apostolic (biblical) gospel, catholicity leads us to appreciate the wholeness of the Church globally and locally. It leads away from competition and control towards cooperation and collaboration. It teaches us to contribute to God’s mission in our unique contexts by sharing all the gifts and resources the Lord has given his church for the health and growth of the whole church there.
Enjoyed this? Try this next: Sanctification by Justification
Notes:
[i] The River Tiber flows through Rome. Crossing it is a metaphor for conversion to Roman Catholicism, as in the title of Stephen K Ray’s 1997 book Crossing the Tiber: Evangelical Protestants Discover the Historical Church (Ignatius Press)
[ii] Amos Yong (2002) 'The Marks of the Church: A Pentecostal Re-Reading', Evangelical Review of Theology, 26(1), pp.45-67
[iii] Couter, Paul B. (2016) Church and Mission in Four Aspects, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Aberdeen
[iv] Ignatius, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans
[v] Ephesians 2:21; 4:16
[vi] Ephesians 1:23; 3:19; 4:13
[vii] 1 Corinthians is a good example of how ‘church’ can mean a congregation or the wider church in an area. Paul writes to one ‘church’ in that city (1 Corinthians 1:2) but also writes of several ‘churches’ meeting in houses there (1 Corinthians 6:19).
[viii] For example see: Karl Barth (1956) Church Dogmatics, Volume IV, Part 1 (T&T Clark), p.714; Charles J. Conniry (1994), ‘Identifying Apostolic Christianity: A Synthesis of Viewpoints’, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 37(2), pp.247-261; Hans Küng (1968) The Church (Burns & Oates), p.344
[ix] Avery Dulles (1999) ‘The Church as “One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic”’, Evangelical Review of Theology, 23(1), pp.14-28
[x] sola fide, sola gratia, solus Christus, soli Deo gloria (faith, grace, Christ and God’s glory alone)
[xi] This is most obvious in Roman Catholic author George Weigel’s 2013 book Evangelical Catholicism (Basic Books), but it is also found among some evangelicals.
[xii] Evangelicalism arose as a movement within Protestantism dedicated to living orthodoxy characterised by four distinctive qualities outlined by historian David Bebbington in his 1989 book Evangelicalism in Modern Britain (Routledge) which include experiential – conversionism and activism – and doctrinal – biblicism and crucicentrism – dimensions.
